Abstract Background Cardiovascular trials increasingly require large sample sizes and long follow-up periods. Several approaches have been developed to optimize sample size such as adaptive group sequential trials, samples size re-estimation based on the promising zone, and the win ratio. Traditionally, the log-rank or the Cox proportional hazards model is used to test for treatment effects, based on a constant hazard rate and proportional hazards alternatives, which however, may not always hold. Large sample sizes and/or long follow up periods are especially challenging for trials evaluating the efficacy of acute care interventions. Purpose We propose an adaptive design wherein using interim data, Bayesian computation of predictive power guides the increase in sample size and/or the minimum follow-up duration. These computations do not depend on the constant hazard rate and proportional hazards assumptions, thus yielding more robust interim decision making for the future course of the trial. Methods PROTECT IV is designed to evaluate mechanical circulatory support with the Impella CP device vs. standard of care during high-risk PCI. The primary endpoint is a composite of all-cause death, stroke, MI or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes with initial minimum follow-up of 12 months and initial enrolment of 1252 patients with expected recruitment in 24 months. The study will employ an adaptive increase in sample size and/or minimum follow-up at the Interim analysis when ∼80% of patients have been enrolled. The adaptations utilize extensive simulations to choose a new sample size up to 2500 and new minimal follow-up time up to 36 months that provides a Bayesian predictive power of 85%. Bayesian calculations are based on patient-level information rather than summary statistics therefore enabling more reliable interim decisions. Constant or proportional hazard assumptions are not required for this approach because two separate Piece-wise Constant Hazard Models with Gamma-priors are fitted to the interim data. Bayesian predictive power is then calculated using Monte-Carlo methodology. Via extensive simulations, we have examined the utility of the proposed design for situations with time varying hazards and non-proportional hazards ratio such as situations of delayed treatment effect (Figure) and crossing of survival curves. The heat map of Bayesian predictive power obtained when the interim Kaplan-Meier curves reflected delayed response shows that for this scenario an optimal combination of increased sample size and increased follow-up time would be needed to attain 85% predictive power. Conclusion A proposed adaptive design with sample size and minimum follow-up period adaptation based on Bayesian predictive power at interim looks allows for de-risking the trial of uncertainties regarding effect size in terms of control arm outcome rate, hazard ratio, and recruitment rate. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: Private company. Main funding source(s): Abiomed, Inc Figure 1
Read full abstract